Evolution of F1 car weight

[Baulz]

Found an interesting paper by Mario Theissen about BMW's F1 engines... between 2000 and 2005 with the 3li V10s they managed to reduce the engine weight from 117kg to 82kg and bring the COG down from 167mm down to 118mm. Power increased from 810bhp to 950bhp.

Since 2006 and the 2.4li V8s the weight and COG of the engine were fixed... 95kg and 165mm, but Theissen suggests BMW could have achieved 69kg and 118mm. I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility to suggest the minimum weight of the power units are a bit OTT and given a little leeway the manufacturers could well bring the weight of the power units down. I guess there's a question of costs though...

It's been a while since I read that but from what I recall the 69kg engine would not have met the reliability requirements that were increased.

[jjn9128]

It's been a while since I read that but from what I recall the 69kg engine would not have met the reliability requirements that were increased.

The reliability requirements I think were the same 2005 to 2006 (1600km). The banning of exotic metals didn't help - but my point was that the minimum weight is probably a bit cautious which would go some way to reducing vehicle weight.

[Jolle]

Taking weight out of the car has a lot of consequences.

I think there is a balance between weight, downforce and power. If you would make the current cars lighter, the braking distance would shorten, corner speed goes up, etc etc. Close racing would be even harder.

[DiogoBrand]

What's interesting about this image is that while the cars got a lot longer over the last few years, they seem to have gotten narrower in the sidepods. So doesn't this basically mean that if the rules mandated that the cars were shorter, they could just make the sidepods wider and be done with it? Of course, it would increase drag, but if it's the same for everyone, who cares?

In my opinion, a nice way to decrease the mass of the cars would be to have a stable set of rules (yeah, like that was possible) and then decrease the minimum weight by 5kg every year so that the weight of the cars could slowly creep down without significantly increasing costs for the teams.

[holeindalip]

Taking weight out of the car has a lot of consequences.

I think there is a balance between weight, downforce and power. If you would make the current cars lighter, the braking distance would shorten, corner speed goes up, etc etc. Close racing would be even harder.

A lighter car requires less downforce to hold it to the track correct? Wouldn't that be better for the following car? I'm not an engineer but it makes sense in my mind... Can you give more examples of why a lighter car would be worse for racing closely?

[michl420]

I know a easy way to reduce car weight, write it in the technical Regulation and every Team will do it. I think 710 kg is possible These days. I know it is expensive, but with the Budget cap it is the same for everyone. For me, lightweight construction should be a big part in Formula one.

How would you take 50kg out of the current cars without them turning in to unsafe places to be in a shunt?

Or do you mean get rid of the heavy, but energy efficient, kit in the back?

If I am not wrong it would be 35 kg, and this should be possible. And there is always the possibility to make the "gearbox" 50 cm shorter, plenty of weight. I mean that all under the current reglement. And if the FIA reduces all min weights by 5 % it would be very easy.

[PlatinumZealot]

The chassis walls are made thicker for safety so that adds tomost of the weight.

[davidc]

I'm not positive, but pretty sure the cars have ballast weight added to them to meet the minimum weight. I don't mean ballast as in lead weights being placed around the car, but I'm pretty sure the cars are built "to" the minimum weight and could be significantly lighter if desired. The cars are over 425lbs heavier than back in the late '70s early 80's when I got into F1. And back then, they didn't use any exotic materials besides a little magnesium and lots of aluminum.

[jjn9128]

I'm not positive, but pretty sure the cars have ballast weight added to them to meet the minimum weight. I don't mean ballast as in lead weights being placed around the car, but I'm pretty sure the cars are built "to" the minimum weight and could be significantly lighter if desired. The cars are over 425lbs heavier than back in the late '70s early 80's when I got into F1. And back then, they didn't use any exotic materials besides a little magnesium and lots of aluminum.

The PU is definitely built to a minimum weight and COG height, but the rest of the car will be as light as possible so the COG can be as low as possible. IIRC from one of Marc "Elvis" Priestley's videos they used to run with 50-60kg of ballast in the late 2000s, pre-KERS and hybrid. In cars which were already 150kg lighter than modern cars.

Remember the minimum car weight didn't include the driver until 1995. Also teams used to run light then top up fluid levels before scrutineering.

[hollus]

The PU is definitely built to a minimum weight and COG height, but the rest of the car will be as light as possible so the COG can be as low as possible...

As light as possible with extra fins, extra sensors, extra robustness, extra lenght, extra thermal elements in the wheel rims, extra Fric, extra inerters, extra anti-sticky paint...
One has to question how many of those elements would make it to the car is the weight limit did not already account for them in advance by catering to the poorest teams.

[godlameroso]

The weight limit is actually hard to reach. Most smaller teams are overweight, so they raise minimum weight to "help" the smaller teams, but the rules end up bloating their cars as well, which means they have to work harder to make minimum weight.

Say you strip weight, but now the weight distribution is wrong, or you sacrifice structural stiffness if you add ballast to make up for the weight you remove. So the chassis development becomes more delicate and resource intensive making it less appealing to smaller teams whose budget can be better spent elsewhere.

The resource spending is a step in the right direction because the backmarkers have more things to fix on their car to reach a more competitive level whereas the top players can focus more on specific areas because they already have the basics down. It kind of slows down the top guys from making global changes and forces them to more narrow improvements. Again, if your stuff is already better to begin with, it's easier to make focused changes. You're already devoting less resources to global troubleshooting.

[mzso]

The chassis walls are made thicker for safety so that adds tomost of the weight.

They could be slimmed down if the payload is less. Shorter car and a lighter power unit also requires less crumple-mass to pass the crash tests.

[SiLo]

A huge amount of the extra length sits just between the gearbox and the engine. Its mostly empty space with a shaft running through it. Whether this adds much to the weight I don't know, but it would bring it down a little.

[wuzak]

The chassis walls are made thicker for safety so that adds tomost of the weight.

They could be slimmed down if the payload is less. Shorter car and a lighter power unit also requires less crumple-mass to pass the crash tests.

Power unit mass has gone up 5kg since 2016.

Car mass has gone up from 702kg to 798kg.

[mzso]

The chassis walls are made thicker for safety so that adds tomost of the weight.

They could be slimmed down if the payload is less. Shorter car and a lighter power unit also requires less crumple-mass to pass the crash tests.

Power unit mass has gone up 5kg since 2016.

Car mass has gone up from 702kg to 798kg.

Interesting.
But how much did it grow when all the batteries and electric motors were added? (2014)